1. - The instant writ petition has been filed for restraining the respondents from making recovery vide impugned order dated 15.2.99 (Annexure- I).

2. The facts of the case are not in dispute. Petitioner had wrongly been given the higher pay scale and when the respondents could find out that mistake, they rectified it and passed the appropriate order, fixed the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and for the past amount, they passed the impugned order for making a recovery to the tune of Rs. 37,501/- from the petitioner.

3. As petitioner himself admits that it was by mistake and the respondents have a right to rectify the said mistake and have done it, the only question is : whether the money paid to him without any fault on the part of the petitioner, can be permitted to be recovered? In support of his contention, petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana, 1995 Suppl (1) SCC 18 , wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:

"The principal erred in granting him the relaxation. Since the date of relaxation the appellant had been paid his salary on the revised scale. However, it is not on account of a